Top 100?

JasonR
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:09 am

Re: Top 100?

Postby JasonR » Sun May 30, 2010 4:46 pm

romothesavior wrote: This year, not a SINGLE REJECTION has been given out to anyone with a 167 or up at Wash U, and only a few have been waitlisted.


Most of those WLs are going to turn into rejections.

A 168 (regardless of the sub-3.0 GPA) would be a near auto-admit at WUSTL.


Bzzzt. Wrong. 4 out of 5 of the applicants with a 168 and a 3.0 or lower have been waitlisted (see above).

2 years off and an ED would be a virtual lock at NW, however.


Wrong again. The last three years on LSN show plenty of non-URM applicants with 172+ scores and low GPAs that were WL'd/rejected. Maybe the odds are better than LSP says, but it's far from "virtual lock." Absurd.

And admissions are not going to get less competitive... they have gotten more competitive every year, so I don't know where you are getting that idea from.


I said "might." When the economy crawls out of the ditch and 171,000 people aren't taking the LSAT in a given year, admissions might be slightly less competitive.

JasonR
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:09 am

Re: Top 100?

Postby JasonR » Sun May 30, 2010 4:48 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Dude, he's fucking right. Shut up.


LOL

Image

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Top 100?

Postby romothesavior » Sun May 30, 2010 5:05 pm

Ah... 4/5 this year from this year is conclusive, right? Look at the last 3-4 years. The majority of people with a 168 or higher have gotten accepted, and wander on over to the WUSTL threads on TLS and you'll find numerous people with sub-3.0 GPAs and high 160s LSATs, and many of them getting money. I may have exaggerated slightly when I said it would be an "auto-admit," but your implication that his odds are in the range of 31% is just wrong.

And many of the NW spitters who got rejected or waitlisted do not have anything about their work experience in their profiles (or lack thereof), which makes it hard to glean anything meaningful from a quick glance at the graphs. But it is clear that they are very friendly to high splitters with WE (172+). Desert Fox is a great example of this.

Also, saying that he needs a 168+ for the T1 is just absurd. Many schools will reject/waitlist him based on that GPA, but a 165-167 would get him into a number of T1 schools.

LSP is practically useless for splitters. LSN is a much, much better tool for determining splitter odds.

User avatar
MURPH
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:20 am

Re: Top 100?

Postby MURPH » Sun May 30, 2010 9:17 pm

I got WL'ed at WUSTL with a 2.98, 175 this year. But I literally put my application in on the very last day that they were accepting them. I heard that you get free beer on Thursday nights but then I heard that it was Bud Light so I was like "I aint going there." At the last minute I decided to stop being such a beer snob and just apply.

User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: Top 100?

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Mon May 31, 2010 10:23 am

Applying to law schools is going to really be many shots in the dark for you.
You should do everything you can to make the case for why you will succeed in law school.
High LSAT/low GPA people can make a strong case because well.. they're better equipped for many of the challenges which will come in law school than those GPA-padders.

highdraws
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 10:27 pm

Re: Top 100?

Postby highdraws » Mon May 31, 2010 11:21 am

Dr. Strangelove wrote:Applying to law schools is going to really be many shots in the dark for you.
You should do everything you can to make the case for why you will succeed in law school.
High LSAT/low GPA people can make a strong case because well.. they're better equipped for many of the challenges which will come in law school than those GPA-padders.


Agreed.

OP, you should rock the LSAT and then apply to schools ranked much higher than the ones you mentioned (If that's your desire. If not, be prepared to negotiate substantial $$ from those lower ranked schools).

As Strangelove said, after you score well your goal should be to make your application argue for your unquestioned future success in law school. I would say you should build an application that conveys maturity, self-discipline and self-motivation because those are the types of questions that come to mind when one sees a high LSAT / low GPA. You may not be this type of person, but the stereotypical image that comes to mind is of a really smart but really lazy person.

If you score high and apply early, schools will really want to snap up your LSAT. But they'll want to know that you're going to put in the work day in and day out as a law student. So the rest of your application should attempt to definitively answer that question.

If you need to get involved in some organizations between now and the fall, then do so. But 3 years of WE would be overkill, IMO.

User avatar
Veyron
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am

Re: Top 100?

Postby Veyron » Mon May 31, 2010 11:25 am

Your goal should not be "Top 100" (whatever that is) but attending the strongest school in the region in which you wish to practice. After the T-14, rankings stop correlating with hiring outside of the region in which a school is located.

hennenr
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 10:18 pm

Re: Top 100?

Postby hennenr » Mon May 31, 2010 1:37 pm

By Top 100 I meant Top 100 law school. I'm sorry for the confusion. I'm just trying to get some advice and I didn't mean to offend you.

User avatar
snowpeach06
Posts: 2426
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Top 100?

Postby snowpeach06 » Mon May 31, 2010 2:59 pm

I had a 161 and only a 3.1. I got into plenty of top 100 schools. You'll be more than fine, since grades don't matter nearly as much as LSATs.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Top 100?

Postby romothesavior » Mon May 31, 2010 4:55 pm

hennenr wrote:By Top 100 I meant Top 100 law school. I'm sorry for the confusion. I'm just trying to get some advice and I didn't mean to offend you.


I don't think he was offended... he was offering advice. For example, if you want to practice in Ohio, you would be better served going to Case Western than going to Cal-Davis, despite Davis' hiring ranking. If you want to practice in St. Louis, you'd be better served going to St. Louis University (a former T2 that is currently outside of the Top 100) than going to Seton Hall, which is in the Top 100. Even so, there are a lot of people on here who would argue going to SLU, SHU, Case, etc. would be a terrible idea no matter what. But we will leave that discussion for another day.

The bottom line is that you should ignore this meaningless Top 100 distinction that you have created in your head because it means virtually nothing for hiring. People will debate the "reach" or the portability of different schools, but as a general guide, look at it like this:

Elite Schools: HYS then CCN
National Powers: The rest of the T12
Quasi-National: GULC, Cornell, Vanderbilt, Texas, UCLA (this list is contentious)
Regional Powers: USC, WUSTL, UIUC, Emory, ND, etc. (and more... but this is contentious as well)
Mediocre Regionals: Most of the T1/T2 and some T3s
Toilets: Everywhere else

Don't look at being in the Top 100 as an important factor. Go to a school that has solid prospects in the region you want to practice.

hennenr
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 10:18 pm

Re: Top 100?

Postby hennenr » Mon May 31, 2010 6:54 pm

Thanks for all the posts everyone! My mind is already starting to feel at ease.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 180orDie, bearedman8, Rogah and 13 guests